The crews of the aircraft were not being allowed to help the teams recover bodies from mountains after a fatality. They also said team members were being left in dangerous situation on Scotland’s mountains when helicopters were promptly withdrawn from an area when a casualty had been recovered.

The Maritime and Coastguard Agency’s crews which fly the Bristow-owned helicopters are mobilised by the Aeronautical Rescue Coordination Centre in Fareham, Hampshire.

The four volunteer teams are collectively part of independent Scottish Mountain Rescue, a breakaway group from the main representative body Scottish Mountain Rescue. The four teams cover some of the most difficult terrain in Scotland, including Ben Nevis, the Cairngorms and the peaks of Glen Coe.

A spokesperson said: “Following our public statement regarding our concerns about the way in which the rescue helicopter (SAR H) contract is being coordinated and operated, the four teams of Glencoe, Lochaber, Tayside and Cairngorm have been overwhelmed and humbled by the level of support that we have received from the public.

“We have been further gratified to find that so many others in the world of mountain rescue and also people with experience in operating and coordinating rescue helicopters have been prepared to lend their support to our concerns. Thank you to each and every one of you.”

A spokesperson for the Maritime and Coastguard Agency said at the time: “HM Coastguard works with many organisations and thousands of volunteers in the vital work of saving lives at sea, on the coast and overland.

“We value and appreciate the work of all volunteers in search and rescue. We know how much what they do matters. We also care greatly for our helicopter crews who often put themselves at great risk to rescue others.

“While the recovery of bodies positively confirmed as deceased is not strictly speaking a search and rescue mission, it is a mission HM Coastguard may support under some circumstances.

“Our crews, when tasked by the helicopter tasking authority – the Aeronautical Rescue Coordination Centre – and in conjunction with the relevant coordinating authority, will attempt to assist the recovery of a dead body if the level of risk to the crews and their passengers, as judged by the ARCC and duty crew, is not considered to be too great.

“This is a dynamic risk assessment conducted on a case-by-case basis taking into account the level of risk. We also need to consider the wider impact to our service in diverting critical lifesaving equipment and personnel. We may need to delay such a recovery during our busier periods.

“Search and rescue helicopters should not routinely be required to clear the hill as fundamentally, a mountain rescue team must be able to operate independently and without helicopter support as conditions on the day might mean that our helicopters are simply unable to reach a team on the hill.
“However, in circumstances where an MR team are on a rescue and where there is a clear risk to the MR team, the helicopter can be asked to remove them from the area to a place of safety.

“If required, this would be through discussion with the Police Scotland duty officer, ARCC duty officer and duty crew, taking into consideration other national taskings and balancing the risk to both the teams and helicopter crews.”

The teams outlined developments since Friday’s public statement.

“We have now received a response from Police Scotland that shows attempts are starting to be made to address the concerns we have had for some time.”

The UK’s volunteer mountain rescue teams operate under the aegis of the police, who request their help in operations.

The iSMR said: “Our concerns have been acknowledged and commitments have been made to attempt to influence the review of the SAR H contract and to encourage the Maritime Coastguard Agency and the Aeronautical Rescue Coordination Centre to adopt a more pragmatic approach to their standard operating procedures.

“We are grateful to Assistant Chief Constable Mark Williams for his personal intervention in progressing this and hope that his efforts will be successful.

“However, we recognise that Police Scotland may not be able to generate the level of change required without a change in stance and practice from the MCA and ARCC.

“The four teams want to positively recognise that Police Scotland has led this first small step forward.

“We have also had invites from several politicians to take up our concerns and we welcome their support. We will follow these invites up.

“Hopefully the strength of support that has been expressed will help the agencies on a longer journey to improve the welfare of the casualty and respect for the deceased and their families, and potentially promote the effectiveness of all volunteer mountain rescue teams by experiencing less avoidable risk and being better able to be ready for the next rescue.”

Search and rescue helicopter operations were previously undertaken by military crews from the RAF and Royal Navy. In 2016 these were transferred under a contract overseen by the UK Department for Transport to new aircraft owned and operated by Bristow, under the control of the Coastguard, under whose logo and colours the helicopters fly.

The ARCC was also transferred from Kinloss in north-east Scotland to the south coast of England.

Carolyn Raistrick

05 November 2018

The recovery of a body whilst it may not have the same 'urgency ' factor should surely still be the responsibility of search and rescue, MRT should not be abanded to struggle on their own I'm sure recovering a body is every bit as dangerous as recovering a live casualty. MRT safety should come before the costs of helicopter call outs, I'm sure they wouldn't ask for assistance unless it was needed and I would to think the fastest recovery of a body would go in some way to reducing anymore unnecessary suffering and stress for the families. I hope for everyone's sake, people who enjoy the mountains, like mysel,for those who live and work in these wild places and for Mountain Rescue volunteers who are a precious godsend that this policy changes.

Jimmy Mac

05 November 2018

The reality is that tying up a helicopter to recover a deceased casualty could be the difference between somebody else living or dying. A person in the water for instance has a survival time measured in minutes in some cases and having a helicopter engaged in recovering a body when an MRT is capable of doing it might be what kills your person in the water.

Obviously where a helicopter can do it much more safely then it should be used (and they are) but they should not and never have been the default option for recovering a body just because it's a bit quicker.

It's a hard reality to stomach sometimes and if it were one of my loved ones it would be a bitter pill to swallow but they are a lifesaving resource and unfortunately that means that these difficult decisions need to be made.

OldManOfTheHills

05 November 2018

I wholeheartedly agree with Jimmy Mac on prioritisation of resources.

However if government privatisation and underfunding mean that service controllers refuse aid to rescue teams to enable them to get off the hill then thats another matter.

The volunteer rescue teams are not obliged to retrieve the dead, and if they didnt the police would have to do it, and I expect the police would get to use a helicopter, so why not let the rescue team have helicopter assistance if, and i do mean if, the helicopter is not needed elsewhere?

Similarly getting a weary rescue team or at least its kit of the hill, could potentially enable them to attend other incidents or at least avoid excess risk and strain to the team.

Ian512

06 November 2018

Doesn't the responsibility for rescue and body recovery rest with the police - volunteer teams assist.

Mike

06 November 2018

Surely leaving the MR teams to make their own way back down further increases the risk to life as they will be temporarily unable to attend to callouts elsewhere?

Jimmy Mac

06 November 2018

I don't think underfunding is really the issue here. The bases in Scotland that deal with the majority of mountain rescue jobs are busier now than they were when the military were still doing it so they are supporting more jobs than the military were able to (the realiability issues that plagued the Sea King towards the end no doubt play a part). If money was an issue I expect that would have dropped but that isn't the case.

The police won't get a helicopter by virtue of being the police, it has to be requested via the ARCC in the same way as any other tasking request. Even the Coastguard have to go via ARCC and they also have their tasking requests knocked back as I understand it despite the livery on the helicopter which might make you think they'd get whatever they ask for. If a request doesn't meet their criteria for supporting they won't support it regardless of the organisation requesting it. Funnily enough it was the same back when it was at Kinloss, the police wouldn't get a helicopter just because they've got a pair of handcuffs!

Regarding MRT availability, where do you draw the line with that? You could easily be tying up a helicopter for a couple of hours when you take into account flight time back to base, refuelling etc and it just isn't feasible to do that every time just so an MRT doesn't have to make their own way off the hill. It is a difficult trade off as an MRT exists to save lives as does a SAR helicopter but a helicopter is going to be going to your time person in the water calls, serious injuries, high risk missing people etc which are really time critical jobs and tying up the helicopters for not insignificant periods of time to clear the hill could be what kills somebody else. Ideally you wouldn't tie up either any longer than necessary but these decisions have to be made and it's a no brainer for me I'm afraid.

I think the bigger picture is getting missed in all of this, understandably perhaps from those who only really have any dealing with the mountain rescue side and don't see how the service is used elsewhere. There's a handful of helicopters covering the whole of the UK with various stakeholders (police, fire, ambulance, coastguard, MRTs etc) all looking to utilise the assets and that is always going to mean that requests will be knocked back.

Add your opinion...

Some comments are automatically held for review before publication

CommentNameE-mail address

Sorry, to post comments on this site you need to have support for JavaScript enabled in your browser.